A storm of debate has erupted in the Jewish world, following the well-publicized assertion by Rabbi David Wolpe of Los Angeles that "the way the Bible describes the Exodus is not the way it happened, if it happened at all."
Wolpe made his declaration before 2,000 worshippers at the Conservative Sinai Temple, and the speech was reported on the front page of the Los Angeles Times. The article entitled, "Doubting the Story of Exodus," asserts that archaeology disproves the validity of the Biblical account.
While people don't usually get worked up about archaeology, the debate about archaeology and the Bible is often passionate and vitriolic.
Biblical Archaeology is often divided into two camps: The "minimalists" tend to downplay the historical accuracy of the Bible, while the "maximalists," who are in the majority and are by and large not religious, tend to suggest that archaeological evidence supports the basic historicity of the Bible text.
As a science, we must understand what archaeology is and what it isn't.
Archaeology consists of two components: the excavation of ancient artifacts, and the interpretation of those artifacts. While the excavation component is more of a mechanical skill, the interpretive component is very subjective. Presented with the same artifact, two world-class archaeologists will often come to different conclusions -- particularly when ego, politics and religious beliefs enter the equation.
In the subjective field of Biblical Archaeology, anyone making a definitive statement like "archaeology has proven..." has probably chosen to take sides and is not presenting the whole picture. When Los Angeles Times reporter Teresa Watanabe writes that "the rabbi was merely telling his flock what scholars have known for more than a decade" (emphasis added), she is revealing her anti-Biblical bias.
HISTORY, THEN AND NOW
Admittedly, however, there is a shortage of Egyptian documentation of the Exodus period. Why?
We need to understand how the ancient world viewed the whole idea of recording history. The vast majority of inscriptions found in the ancient world have a specific agenda -- to glorify the deeds of the king and to show his full military power.
The earliest known objective "historian," in our modern definition of the term, was the Greek writer Herodotus. He is generally considered the "father of historians" for his attempt to compile a dispassionate historical record of the war between the Greeks and Persians. Abraham is dated to the 18th century BCE, while the Exodus story is generally dated to the 13th century BCE -- 800 years before Herodotus.
This does not mean that early civilizations did not record events. It’s just that their purpose was more propaganda than creating any kind of objective historical record.
The British Museum in London displays inscriptions from the walls of the palace of the Assyrian Emperor, Sancheriv. These show scenes from Sancheriv's military campaigns from the 8th century BCE, including graphic depictions of destroyed enemies (decapitations, impalings, etc.). Sancheriv himself is depicted as larger than life.
But one element is missing from these inscriptions: There are no dead Assyrians! That is consistent with the ancient "historical" style -- negative events, failures and flaws are not depicted at all. When a nation suffers an embarrassing defeat, they usually whitewash the mistakes and destroy the evidence.
This idea has significant ramifications for archeology and the Exodus. The last thing the ancient Egyptians wanted to record is the embarrassment of being completely destroyed by the God of a puny slave nation. Would the Egyptians ever want to preserve details of the destruction of fields, flocks, and first borns -- plus the death of Pharaoh and the entire Egyptian army at the Red Sea?
In other words, we wouldn’t expect to find prominent attention to Moses’ humiliation of Pharaoh -- even if it occurred.
In one major event, the battle of Kadesh on the Orantes River between the Hitites and the Egyptian Pharaoh Ramses II, both sides record it as a major victory, and is depicted as such.
Interestingly, the Torah is unique among all ancient national literature in that it portrays its people in both victory and defeat. The Jews -- and sometimes their leaders -- are shown as rebels, complainers, idol-builders, and yes, descended from slaves.
This objective portrayal lends the Torah great credibility. As the writer Israel Zangwill said: "The Bible is an anti-Semitic book. Israel is the villain, not the hero, of his own story. Alone among the epics, it is out for truth, not heroics."
INCOMPLETE ARCHEOLOGICAL RECORD
The archeological process is tedious and expensive. To date, only a tiny fraction of archeological sites related to the Bible have been excavated.
This thin archeological record means that any conclusions are based on speculation and projection. Archeology can only prove the existence of artifacts unearthed, not disprove that which hasn't been found. Lack of evidence... is no evidence of lack.
Yet that has not stopped some archeologists from making bold assertions. In the 1950s, world-renowned archeologist Kathleen Kenyon dug in one small section of Jericho, looking for remnants of inhabitation at the time of Joshua’s conquest of the land in 1272 BCE. She found no evidence, and concluded on that basis that the Bible was false.
The problem is that Kenyon dug only one small section of Jericho, and based her conclusion on that limited information. Today, though the controversy lingers, many archeologists claim there is indeed clear evidence of inhabitation in Jericho from the time of Joshua.
Archeology is a new science, and the record is far from complete. We have only begun to scratch the surface.
TEXTUAL MISTAKES
The Times writer makes other mistakes, such as reading the Biblical text without the accompanying Talmudic explanation. For example, in trying to demonstrate Biblical inconsistency, the Times writes: "One passage in Exodus says that the bodies of the pharaoh's charioteers were found on the shore, while the next verse says they sank to the bottom of the sea."
The preeminent Biblical commentator, Rashi, explains that after the Egyptians drowned, the sea threw them onto the shore, so that the Jewish people could be relieved at the knowledge that their enemies would no longer be in pursuit. (Exodus 14:30)
The credibility of the Times' article is further eroded by its quoting another Los Angeles rabbi who mistakenly asserts that it does not matter "whether we [Jews] built the pyramids."
But as it says clearly in Exodus 1:11 and in the Passover Haggadah, the Jews "built the store-cities of Pitom and Ramses." Jews never built any pyramids, which were built in 2500 BCE -- about 1200 years before the Exodus.
FOUNDATION OF OUR PEOPLE
The Los Angeles Times asserts: "[M]ost congregants, along with secular Jews and several rabbis interviewed, said that whether the Exodus is historically true or not is almost beside the point."
We would disagree. The truth of the text is precisely the point. By attacking the veracity of the Exodus, and reducing it to mere fable, these rabbis knock out the most basic Jewish principle of the past 3,300 years.
The Ten Commandments declares from the start: "I am the Lord Your God."
But that’s only half the story. A reading of the full verse shows how belief in God is predicated on the Exodus experience: "I am the Lord Your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt from the house of slavery" (Exodus 20:2).
The Jewish people have survived for thousands of years, against all odds, because we knew clearly the truth of Torah. When Jews in the Crusades chose to be burned at the stake rather than convert, they were not subscribing to some weak fable. To suggest otherwise is an insult to the millions of Jews who have died for our beliefs.
Whether layperson or rabbi, for those who reject the truth of Torah and the obligatory nature of commandments, rejecting the Torah's historical accounts follows suit.
For over 3,000 years, the Jewish people have faithfully transmitted the Exodus story, unique in the annals of world history. From parent to child, and teacher to student, it is an unbroken chain of transmission. Is it true? Click here for a deeper look at the question.
This is part one of a series. Part two will consider specific claims and counter-claims implicating the historicity of the Bible.
For more background on this topic, the Discovery Seminar presents an excellent overview of the gamut of Jewish history, philosophy, and literature. For a current schedule, e-mail discovery.usa@aish.com, or visit the Discovery website.
This is part one of a series. Specific claims and counter-claims implicating the historicity of the Bible can be found in Archaeology and the Bible - Part Two .
(38) sd sd, August 29, 2019 9:42 AM
Crash Course in Jewish History is not only comprehensive and readable, it is also entertaining and enlightening. Novices and scholars alike will find Crash Course in Jewish History to be thought-provoking and insightful, as well as a valuable and relevant guide to understanding the challenges we all face in the 21st century.
(37) G M Matheny, December 19, 2012 11:05 PM
Their inability to find something is what they offer as proof!
We are told it would have been very difficult for such a multitude wandering around out on the desert to have lived for more than a short time. Yes, and the same could be said about one person out on the desert. They are forgetting God, Who supplied water, meat (quail) and daily bread (Nehemiah 9:20). They believe that encampments of such a multitude would have left some sort of “trash” for them to follow, but they are still trying to figure out which route the children of Israel were on. “Yea, forty years didst thou sustain them in the wilderness, so that they lacked nothing; their clothes waxed not old, and their feet swelled not.” (Nehemiah 9:21) There was no thrown away, worn-out clothing, no piles of leftover manna as it melted (Exodus 16:21), and they left no “soda bottles or gum wrappers” for them to follow. As others have brought out, the Israelites the critics are looking for never existed, because they do not believe God provided for them, but the truth is Israel “lacked nothing”! Their inability to find something is what they offer as proof! They only recently found (2002) the “workers’ village” for the pyramids of the Giza Plateau. It is estimated this town housed 20,000 people and was built out of bricks, whereas the children of Israel lived in tents. And this discovery only came after they had searched every inch of the Giza Plateau for the last two hundred years of archaeology.
(36) Arlan Blodgett, October 22, 2012 6:40 AM
Give me the the following dates in BCE
for the exodus, for the biblical flood, for creation? Thank you
(35) E, October 7, 2011 12:10 AM
Similar to nowadays
Something similar happened in Israel's recent wars. In the Yom Kippur war of 1973, for example, the Egyptians were celebrating victory in the middle of the war even though the heads knew they were in trouble. Funny to watch. You can YouTube YK was documentaries. Obviously what happens nowadays in Egypt has no bearing on what happened there 3300 years ago, but it does say something about human nature.
(34) Dennis E. Means, M.D., January 5, 2011 8:38 PM
excluded from textbooks
In response to your article regarding the omission of Egyptian defeats and failures from the time of the Exodus, I have an interesting anecdote. Two years ago while helping my son prepare an elementary school paper on the American Revolution, I decided to get the British perspective on the subject. I was quite shocked to learn that the subject is not taught in British schools. Not only is it excluded from their textbooks, but the British teachers I corresponded with could not direct me to any British source for my research!
(33) Mike Tannenbaum, January 5, 2011 8:37 PM
previously unknown places
About two years ago I had a talk with Dr. Peter Machinist, who is chairman of the Department of Ancient Languages at Harvard University. Dr. Machinist pointed out that Exodus contains names of previously unknown places listed as stopping points for the escaping Israelites. These names have now been identified from Egyptian wall paintings. The amazing thing is that these names are listed in the exact same order in the Egyptian paintings as they appear in Exodus. As Dr. Machinist pointed out, the listing as it appears in Exodus constitutes an actual road map of the area at that time. These place names did not exist in later days so later writer would have had no way of knowing about them.
(32) Brian Louis, August 4, 2010 7:30 PM
A small anecdote to the truth of the Scriptures as the Word of God
The author of the article states: "The vast majority of inscriptions found in the ancient world have a specific agenda -- to glorify the deeds of the king and to show his full military power." If this is true, then something to meditate on is the fact that the Bible often rebukes and repudiates the deeds of the leaders and Kings whom if it were written by men it would have sought to glorify. The fact that the Bible treats Israel not as a nation to be glorified, but rather taught of its place in history and its relationship to God would serve at the very least to suggest the unbiased nature of the biblical account. When you replace the subject for the author's statement, "...glorify the deeds of the king and to show his full military power." with God Himself, it can be used be used to suggest that although the Bible may have been written by mere men, it was actually authored by God. The only alternative explanation (that I can think of) is to suggest that the authors of the Scriptures were exceptional in their honesty and desire to authentically preserve history, yet were somehow temporarily insane when it came to recreating the miraculous events of the Bible. For many reasons this explanation doesn't hold much water with me.
(31) , July 21, 2010 1:08 AM
Kathleen Kenyon, from what I read,originally dated the destruction of Jericho around 1400 bce. At the urging of other archeologists, she changed it because the exodus was historically placed around 1230 bce. According to Bible chronology from I Kings 6:1, the Exodus would have taken place around 1440 bce and the conquest of Canaan Around 1400 bce. That is based on the reign of Solomon which is historically placed as beginning in 982, making the beginning of the temple building in 978 bce. The Exodus would have bee in 1458 bce and the destruction of Jericho in 1414. Kenyon was right. She also noted that Jericho was built with double walls as the Bible mentions when speaking about the house Rehob being built on the walls. They used timbers to span the inner and outer walls to accommodate houses, which was very uncommon in Canaan at that time. Kenyon also wrote that the city suffered total destruction by intense fire.
(30) anafa, June 13, 2010 8:29 AM
archeological discovery of the bible
i appreciated your piece of write up and which is something that i have been wondering that possibly as Kenyon, a lot of archeologist might be looking in the wrong direction for facts. furthermore bias and selfish interest might make them to distort and report falsely the truth. but nevertheless it still stands and the bible will be vindicated. are their christian scientist that have raised money to follow and carry out archeological proof beyond doubt. pls link me with such group of archeologist.
(29) Myriam S. Gabbay, February 5, 2010 12:08 AM
The date of the building of the pyramids
the flood took place in 2104 b.c.e., therefore the pyramids could not have been built in 2500 b.c.e. I'm assuming the author is referring to the dates that the historians use but as such, he should make a note about this. Since Mitzrayim was one of the sons of Ham, and he founded the Egyptian nation, and he wasn't born till after the flood, obviously the pyramids, which were considered the crowning achievement of Egyptian civilization, architecturally, could not yet have existed.
(28) TruthSayer, December 21, 2009 6:16 PM
Excellent Unbiased Documentary!
I've seen MANY "mock-umentaries" done by non-believers; 99% out to try and prove something inprobable. The Scriptures tell of many things that are provable, yet sadly many set out to try and prove otherwise. And there is no such thing as an "unbiased" person. That's impossible. Everyone that is conscious has a world-view of some sort. To say there is an "unbiased" movie, is not only wrong, but obsurd. I pray that "Niel" would look for the truth, not look for a way to disprove something that conflicts with his own personal BIAS. GOD bless you all!
(27) Neil, August 31, 2008 12:24 PM
Exodus
I recently watched a documentary called "Exodus Revealed" originally released in 2001 by by Dr. Lennart Moller. It is available on DVD from Netflix and Amazon, etc. It presents the biblical account in an unbiased manner showing archeological discoveries that confirm the reality of the Exodus account. One amazing portion of the documentary shows the underwater camera films of the chariot wheels and axles. It also supports the belief that Mt. Sanai is in Saudi Arabia. This is another example once again that proves that the Bible is trustworthy and accurate.
(26) Dave Swerer, March 27, 2006 12:00 AM
Thanks
Great, objective, rational comment on Biblical Archeology. Its not easy being a believer (Jew or Christian) when so much of "science" is skewed by the "author". Your perspective and balance is reassuring. Thanks so much.
(25) Walter R. Mattfeld, September 2, 2003 12:00 AM
Praise for Art on Title
The artistic rendering of the war chariot and the Exodus Title is "stunning" the artist who conceived and rendered this is to be commended (I am a retired teacher of Art)!
(24) Stephen Clothier, April 30, 2003 12:00 AM
Eloquent Defense of Tradition
I can NOT believe that Rabbi Wolpe would undermine the historicity of an event which is pivotal in the history of the Jewish people. He is truly a disgrace to his synagogue. Apart from his spiritual void, his views fly in the face of all logic; he is obviously swayed by the Minimalist approach to Torah tradition, which, even to the non-religious, must, in the end, seem absurd. It is almost as if these "scholars" (and I use the term loosely) derive a perverse satisfaction from tearing down the story of an event, which has enshrined itself in the minds of all Jews (and most Christians -- if not for the fact that the Last Supper of Christ was a Seder meal, because the Exodus story reveals God's concern for the down-trodden). Rabbi Spiro has made a very good point about ancient monarchs never recording defeats, and transforming near-defeats into victories (i.e., Ramesses II at the Battle of Kadesh). The British Egyptologist Kenneth A. Kitchen makes a very good case for the historicity of the Patriarchal narratives and the Exodus in his 1977 publication, "The Bible in its World: The Bible and Archaeology Today." In an observation analogous to Rabbi Spiro's point that the Jews were unique in their willingness to depict themselves in a negative light, he points out that the stories in Gen./Exodus (Bereshit/Shemot) cannot be classed with any other Ancient Near Eastern narratives, in that they deal with the mundane concerns of a pastoral people (the importance of heirs, family squabbling, quarrels over wells). The fact that God is mentioned should not invalidate the narratives, which, on the whole, are not studded with the extravagant claims of other Near Eastern legends. If we are to dismiss them, we have to assume that the Torah is representative of "a realistic historical fiction type of writing," which did not come into being until comparatively recently.
Bravo, Rabbi Spiro!
(23) Morton Gale, June 10, 2001 12:00 AM
Excellent observations
As a layman, interested in Archeology, this is a most interesting commentary
(22) BEN BLUFARB, May 18, 2001 12:00 AM
first rate defence
If Rabbi Wolpe’s disbelief rests in pure science, where does his Torah belief begin and end? Science, of course, always waits for the next discovery or proof of its theories to attain its truth; Torah does not require that standard.
Daniel, August 12, 2011 5:08 PM
Archeology is hardly science
I wouldn't even give Wolpe the credit that his beliefs rest on science. If you understand the scientific method, it is not hard to appreciate the fact that the "interpretation" aspect of archeology is not science at all. The term science really only applies to chemistry and physics; biology gets away with being a science because organisms depend on the order found in chemistry and physics to function. Within those realms, you can make testable predictions. Everywhere else... technically, not science. For example, you sure can't make testable predictions with archeology, can you! It is practically admitted in these comments and in the original article that you can barely ever disprove anything with archeological evidence. The main tenant of scientific philosophy is that you can't prove anything: but you can perform tests to disprove some things. All you can know for certain from archeology is that, "Someone dropped or built something at this site, and statistically speaking it was probably around such-and-such time." You can learn a little about who they might have been from the tools they used, perhaps. But the fact that I own and use a screw driver from time to time and decorate my walls with some art tells you very, very little about who I am, what I have done with my life, what I believe, and what has happened to me!
(21) ronnie rone, May 15, 2001 12:00 AM
the truth is required
Found your websight while looking for a jewish calendar. Like what you have to say will be on your sight more often.
(20) Lillian Grogin, May 14, 2001 12:00 AM
Excellent
Enjoyed this article very much
and have passed it on -
thanks for all the information -
(19) Anonymous, May 8, 2001 12:00 AM
Superb!
One of the best articles I've read on aish.com.
(18) , May 7, 2001 12:00 AM
Thought provoking article.
Not everything in the realm of faith can be explained.
(17) Jeanne Zanger, May 4, 2001 12:00 AM
Thank you for strengthening my faith.
I was recommended your remarkable site by Dr. Macgovern, suggested by the LA Times. Please accept my gratitude for presenting this elaborate dessertation of rational study of Dr. Wolpe's statement.I am circulating it among my professors of Jewish History and Rabbi.
(16) Anonymous, May 4, 2001 12:00 AM
Great article I look forward to the next.
Great article I look forward to the next. One only has to consider the Egyptians Pharohs mutilating evidence of other dynasties to see that Egyptian historical evidence is clearly biased. This is not new and has been refuted by Jews, consider Josephus against Menentho concerning the true account of history.
(15) Sean Armin, May 4, 2001 12:00 AM
I truly enjoyed reading Rabbi Spiro's article on Archeology and Exodus.
This article really has strengthened my faith after starting to have doubts with reading the LA times article.
(14) Jack Lauber, May 3, 2001 12:00 AM
an excellent overview of the limitations of Archaelogy
An Objective view of the Exodus from a historical, religious basis.It srengthens our faith as Jews.
(13) Mordecai Rottman, May 3, 2001 12:00 AM
If one cannot trust the time worn, tear stained, dedicated golden chain of Jewish tradition, passed on so faithfully from father to son, mother to daughter for so many centuries, then one certainly can't trust the reporting of the Los Angeles Times!
(12) Ken Applebaum, May 1, 2001 12:00 AM
very good article
I am happy that you are taking on an issue which has "bothered" me off and on for a number of years. Your direct approach at dealing with the issue is refreshing. Please continue the good work; and, if you would, please elaborate on the fact that most of the relevant Biblical sites have not been excavated. In this regard, do you know how much of the Sinai has been excavated?
Ken Applebaum (an Aish supporter and one crucially interested in the veracity of the Torah).
(11) Zachary Kessin, April 30, 2001 12:00 AM
Absence of Evidence is not Evidence of Absence
Ok I am not an archaeologist, but it would seem to me that proving that event "X" did not happen would be very hard. For example, we might find evidence of a bunch of folks moving through the Sinai about 3000 years ago. Now, even if you could somehow show that they were not the Israelites. (If for example there were pig bones) that does not mean that there were not other groups in that area within a few hundred years of them. Maybe the camp you found was someone's army going from here to there (It had to happen I would think) So I have no idea how you could prove that it did not happen.
(10) Eli Reidler, April 30, 2001 12:00 AM
no exodus? who made up the story?
If the Exodus did not happen, who made up this story? At what point in history was the story invented? Who bought the story? How did it get believed and propogated? Guess what! Impossible!
(9) Anonymous, April 30, 2001 12:00 AM
Thanks for saying the interpretation is SUBJECTIVE.
I believe this is a stench in the nostrils of the Almighty for one of the chosen people doubt the validity of the great story of Moses. They are saying that Moses is a liar and make the Passover less important. I certainly do not share their views.
(8) Anonymous, April 30, 2001 12:00 AM
Archeology and nomadic groups
First, it's axiomatic in Archeology that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Second, it is almost impossible to find evidence of nomadic groups. For example, we would not find archeological evidence of the plains Indians becuase the nature of their material goods was perishable i.e. clothing, tents etc. If there were no eyewitness written records or actual descendents we would not know about them. In contrast, South American Indians left impressive physical remains, i.e cities, temples that enable us to reconstruct their life styles. So too with the Exodus. The Jews carried everything with them.
(7) Milton Nathanson, April 30, 2001 12:00 AM
The rabbi forgets that much of ancient history was destroyed with the final destruction of the great library at Alexandria. It is almost impossible to prove using archaeological evidence a negative, vis a vie the that King David never existed according to some "authorities" until 1992.
(6) Anonymous, April 30, 2001 12:00 AM
Lack of evidence... is no evidence of lack
It certainly is with regard to "proof" of evolution. After thousands of fossils have been found and not one has been (or ever will be) the "missing link", that is very strong evidence contrary to evolutionary theories.
(5) Marvin Peyser, April 29, 2001 12:00 AM
There are plenty of clues pointing to the Exodus
About two years ago I had a talk with Dr. Peter Mechanic, who is chairman of the Dep't of Ancient Languages at Harvard University. Dr. Mechanic pointed out that Exodus contains names of previously unknown places listed as stopping points for the escaping Israelites. These names have now been identified from Egyptial wall paintings. In the Egyptian version they appear as the names of towns captured by an advancing Egyptian army at about the same time frame as the Exodus. (The army captured Place A, then went to Place B and captured it, etc.) The amazing thing is that these names are listed in the exact same order in the Egyptian paintings as they appear in Exodus. As Dr. Mechanic pointed out, the listing as it appears in Exodus constitutes an actual road map of the area at that time. These place names did not exiat in later days, so a later writer would have had no way of knowing about them.
(4) Anonymous, April 29, 2001 12:00 AM
David Wolpe was my Rabbi when I was in junior high. I'm so disappointed!
(3) Naomi Skillman, April 29, 2001 12:00 AM
Historical record keeping
I could not help but think of King Solomon's words,(There is nothing new under the sun) when I first read Rabbi Wolpe's comment.
It is my understanding that in the past 50-60 years the textbooks in USA schools have changed the 'facts' of the founding and settlement of the 'new world'. Reading media stories of happenings in our own time, even, it is hard to discern what is actually happening. The reports from CNN and other US reporters compared to those from Palestinian sources and/or Israeli sources are extremely different. We tend to believe what suits us best; which just goes to confirm your statement that different conclusions are reached "particulary when ego, politics, and religious beliefs enter the equation". I continually thank God for aish.com helping me make, what I choose to believe, are informed opinions.
(2) Rachel Rieser, April 29, 2001 12:00 AM
New Times, New Evidence
Archeology is not the total answer. The satellite evidence of a path trod upon Sinai by at least 1 milliion people which culminates at a site where the sea does part with a strong east wind and crosses to Saudi along a way to a mountain which meets all Torah physical descriptions should be acknowledged. See The Gold of Exodus by Howard Blum and other sources.
The Ipuwer Papyrus is very convincing concerning the Plagues. In character for such writings by the Egyptians as you point out, it does not give credit or blame to G-d or our people, but was such a noteworthy event, this man felt compelled to write it down.
Year after year, archeological and other evidence comes to light which supports our history and that of Josephus, who was not always believed to be accurate.
I find nothing to dispute the Exodus as described by G-d in the Torah.
(1) adina van meijeren, April 29, 2001 12:00 AM
How can a person call himself a Rabbi when he does not believe in the very principals of the faith he preaches?